THEATTORNEY GENERAL 

oFTEXA~ 

Honorable Robert S. Calvert opinion NO. c-725 

Comptroller of Public Accounts 

Capitol Station Re: Whether a family relaAustin, Texas tlonshlp is necessary 

Inorder to claim a 

homestead exemption from 

the ad valoren tax, and 

Dear Mr. Calvert: related question. 

You requested an opinion from this office upon the 

following questions: 

“(1) Is a family relationship 

necessary to have available to a property owner the exemption from Ad 

Valoren Taxes?” 

Further, if the answer to question (1) is in th.e affirmative, you have requested us to answer the following question: 

“(2) A husband and wife own a 

home and are allowed the homestead 

exemption from State Ad Valoren Tax. 

Neither has any kin. Later they divorce, 

with the husband receiving title to the 

hone in the settlement and he continues 

to reside alone in the home. May he 

legally continue to receive the homestead 

exemption from State Ad Valorem Tax year 

after year?” 

The pertinent Texas constitutional provisions which govern 

the homestead exemption are Article XVI, Section 50; Article 

XVI, Section 51; Article VIII, Sections l-a and l-b. The controlling statutory provision is Article 7048a, Section 2, Vernon’s 

Civil Statutes. 

Article XVI, Section 50 of the Texas Constitution provides, 

In part, as follows : 

“The homestead of a family shall be, 

and Is hereby protected from forced sale,. . ,” 

-3486- 
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, Page 2 (C-725) 

Article XVI, Section 51, which describes the kind and 

character of the property of which the homestead shall conslst, reads as follows: 

“The homestead, not in a town or 

city shall consist of not more than two 

hundred acres of land, which may be In 

one or more parcels, with the inprovenents thereon; the homestead In a city 

town or village, shall consist of lot, 

or lots, not to exceed In value five 

thousand dollars, at the time of their 

designation as the homestead, without 

reference to the value of any improvements thereon; provided, that the same 

shall be used for the purpose of a home, 

or as a place to exercise the calling or 

business of the head of a family; prc.lf~ded 

also, that any temporary renting OT the 

homestead shall not chrge the chamter of 

the sane, when no other homestead has been 

acquired e ” 

Article VIII, Section l-a of the Texas Constitution prcvldes, in part, as. follows: 

“From and after January 1, 1951, no 

State ad valoren tax shall be levied upon 

any property within this State for general 

revenue purposes. From and after January 

1, 1951, the several counties of the State 

are authorized to levy ad valorem taxes 

upon all property within their respective 

boundaries for county purposes except the 

first Three Thousand Dollars ($3,OCC) value 

of residential homesteads, not to exceed 

thirty cents (3%) on each One Hundred Dollars 

$y,a;~;;;;;;~ In addition to all other 

” (Emphasis added 

throughout unless othekwise stated). 

Article VIII, Section l-b of the Texas Constitution provides as follows: 

“Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000) of 

the assessed taxable value of all residence 

homesteads as now defined by law shall be 

exempt from all taxation for all State purpose.” 

-3487- 
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, Page 3 (C-725) 

The statutory enactment, Article 7048a, Section 2, states: 

“From and after January 1, 1951, 

the several counties of the State be 

and they are hereby authorized to levy, 

assess and collect ad valoren taxes 

upon all property within their resnective 

boundaries for county purposes, 

the first Three Thousand Dollars 

value of FesidetitiaI 

Exemptions from taxation are strictly construed. In the 

case of City of Wichita Falls v. Cooper, 173 S.W.2d 777, (Tex. 

Civ.App. 1943, error ref.) the court stated at page 780: 

“It Is the universal rule in this 

state that the Constitution has definitely 

provided for every form of exemption of 

property from taxation; that If an exenptlon Is so made it cannot be enlarged upon 

either by the Legislature or by the courts. 

Some courts have gone far enough to say 

that if there Is a reasonable doubt as to 

the meaning of the Constitution In matters 

of exemption, the doubt will be resolved 

against the exemption, for exemptions from 

taxation are not favored by the Constitution 

nor by the Courts In their construction. 

it f Dal1 Cochran (T 1 A 

S.Wy ?2, wriyrzhused); J&ese~:cW~il~% 

166 

121 T;?xl 94, 45 S.W.2d 130, 79 A.L.R, 983: 

11 .Art. 8, Sect. l-a (as amended in 1933) 

la lik&wise specific and self enacting to the 

extent therein stated. There, $3,cxU of assessed 

taxable value of the residencehomestead Is 

exempt ,:fron all taxation for all purposes’ 

. . d . 

The exemption provided for under Article VIII, Sections 

l-a and l-b is limited to a residence homestead and does hot 

apply to the business homestead. Attorney General Opinion 

No. 0-1800 (1940). 

-3488- 
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, Page 4 (C-725) 

A person claiming the benefits of 

.~ 

the homestead exenptions must prove that there is a familial relatlonshlp In 

order to obtain the benefits of the exemption. In Plough. 

Inc. v. Moore, 56 S.W.2d 681, (Tex.Cir.App. 1933, error r( 

tne court states at page 681: 

Ef.), 

In order to obtain the benefits 

of the lx&&Ion, the family relationship 

or status must exist among those claiming 

the benefits of the exemption. This necessarily presupposes a condition of depenm 

dence, either in law or fact, by one or 

more members of the group upon the other 

as the head of the family. Constitution, 

Art. 16, 850; Revised Statutes, art. 3833; 

Rzao v. Green, 50 Tex. 483, ‘19% Howard v. 

Marshall 48 Tex. 471, 477; Whltehead v. 

Nickelson, 48 Tex. 517, 529. 

II . . , . 

II The mere fact that the two 

plaintifiz’were associated together . . . 

did not entitle then to have such property exempted from forced sale either 

as a business or residential homestead 

In the absence of the existence of the 

farnil-y relationship. . . , ” 

In the often cited case of Roco v. Green, su ra the 

general rules to follow to determine whether a Tp-I anillal Btionship exists, as contemplated by law are as follows: 

“1. It Is one of social status, not 

of mere contract. 

“2. Legal or moral obligation on the 

head to support the other members. 

"3. Corresponding state of dependence 

on the part of the other members 

of this support 0” 

In Bahm v. Starcke, 89 Tex. 203, 34 S.W. 103 (I896), at 

page 105, Chief Justice Gaines states: 

“The divorce destroys the particular 

family, the existence of which gave the 

right of exemptions, and hence destroys 

the right of homestead as to that family 

. . . . Section 50 -roof the Constitution-7 

-3489- 
. . 

Hon. Robert S. Calvert, Page 5 (C-725) 

exempts ‘the homestead of a family’, and 

the general rule is ‘no fanil 

stead’. The worddiaz’o?- 

family’ ha;e a well-defined meaning, and 

are not open to a construction which 

would Include the homestead of a sinple 

oerson without a fanil~.” 

Based upon the language of the constitutional provisions, 

the statutory enactment, the case law and Attorney General’s 

Opinion No. 0-180C (1943), we hold that a familial relationship must exist In order for a property owner to be entitled 

to the residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxes 

under Article VIII, Sections l-a and l-b of the Texas 

Constitution and Section 2 of Article 7C48a. 

Since question (1) has been answered In the affirmative, 

it becomes necessary, pursuant to your request, to answer 

question (2). 

The cases of Bahn v. Starcke, su ra; Tanton v. State 

National Bank, 125 Tex. 16 79 S.W h33 '(1935) Clack v. 

w1111 189 S.W.2d 533 (4ex Clv,App. 1945 no writ 

&erg v. Hubbard, 326 S,W.2d’605 (Tei.Civ.App. 

no writ hist.) stand for the proposition that a divorce 

destroys the h&nestead exemption and a single person without 

any dependents is not entitled to claim a homestead exemption. 

In accordance with the foregoing court decisions, It Is 

the opinion of this office that the familial relationship having been dissolved by divorce and there being no minor children 

or dependents, the homestead exemption cannot be allowed. 

SUMMARY ---B-eA familial relationship Is necessary 

in order to obtain a homestead exemption to 

the extent provided In Article VIII, Sections 

l-a and l-b of the Texas Constitution and 

Section.,2 of Article 7048a, V.C.S. Under the 

facts presented, the divorce decree dissolved 

the homestead exemption and the property owner 

should not be allowed the exemption of the 

residential homestead from ad valoren taxation 

-3490- 
. . 

Hon. Robert S. Calvert, Page 6 (C-725) 

to the extent provided in Article VIII 

Sections l-a and l-b of the Texas Constitution and Section 2 of Article 7o48a. 

Very truly yours, 

WAGGONER CARR 

Attorney General 

BYE 

'Terry Reed ~Goodman 

Assistant 

TRG:ced 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

John Banks 

Bill Allen 

Marietta McGregor Payne 

John Pettit 

APPROVED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

By: T. B. Wright 

-3491-